Photo by William Alatriste

The City Council voted yesterday to pass the most far-reaching and transparent open data legislation in the nation.

The Open Data Bill will require city agencies to release government data to the public online in spreadsheets to speed analysis and trend spotting by the government, outside groups, and citizens alike.

The bill will be fully enacted by 2018. The first wave of data — that which is already available online — will be combined into one web portal within the year. The bill will also create an online forum for citizens to provide feedback on the data released and request more specific data or point out trends.

“What we're striving to do here is making sure we get the total data and get it out there regularly,” Council Speaker Christine Quinn said, adding that the bill will create a “more transparent, effective and I hope, problem-solving focused government.”

As the city aims to adapt its governing policies to the digital age, it is becoming increasingly transparent. The bill has been lauded by good government groups like Citizens United, which noted that its ability to analyze lobbying data will help its work. Gotham Gazette is published by Citizens Union's sister organization the Citizens Union Foundation.

The FOILable Data

The data that will be disclosed is essentially all the data the city would otherwise release if released via a Freedom of Information Act request. There are exceptions to the rule — like employment and legal data, and the data sets used by only one agency and stored on one computer.

The bill will cost the city around a million dollars, Quinn said, “it’s a lot of data.” But she doesn’t expect additional staff to be added for it. The bill doesn’t include an enforcement mechanism, but Quinn said that with the Mayor’s support, “'we don't expect anything but full compliance.”

As for the city’s game plan to enact the massive data release, the bill’s lead sponsor Gale Brewer said that’s up to the Department of Information Technology and Telecommunications, with input from the Council of course.

Gov 2.0

The bill is just one part of the city’s push for data-driven innovation and crowd-sourced problem solving. In January 2011, Rachel Sterne was hired as the city’s first Chief Digital Officer. In May, Sterne released the city’s first Digital Roadmap — a 65-page document outlining the city’s digital engagement and plans to connect with its citizens — that highlighted the city’s intention to release more data online.

“We have a very data driven government in New York,” Sterne said late last year at the data-centric NY Strata conference. “We are measurement oriented and we are results oriented.”

Putting that data online, Quinn said, will help the City to more effectively problem solve, noting an early success of this style of problem solving: the MTA’s release of bus data, which allowed third-party developers to create online applications giving real-time arrival and departure estimates of the city’s buses.

With the new data, Quinn hopes the city, public, and third party groups will be able to problem solve and spot trends in traffic accident, illegal conversion and inspections data.

In her Strata speech, Sterne noted that there are already dozens of applications that use city data to create useful apps, like DontEat.at, a Foursquare app that texts consumers who have checked into a restaurant at risk of being closed for health code violations. The release of additional data — like that in the Council bill — often allows third-party developers to better communicate the information. "As long as the right information was getting to citizens, that's all that matters," Sterne said at the NY Strata conference. "It's OK if it's decentralized, as long as the reach is being expanded."

Daniel Garodnickand fellow council members are looking to pass a bill which would give anyone with a smartphone, the ability to pull up a detailed report from any publicly posted permit. People would be able to check places like restaurants for health violations, simply by scanning a Quick Response (QR) code that would have to be printed on the certificates.

The bill would work together with the Open Data bill introduced by Councilwoman Gale Brewer that is expected to pass tomorrow. Together, the two pieces of legislation would give New Yorkers a new window into their city. Currently, the city is putting many public records and permits online, though this sometimes requires digging on a computer.

“We want to make it available to them right there, on the street, when they’re standing in front of a letter grade restaurant or a street vendor or a parking permit,” said Garodnick. “This should be very easily accessible to them.”

The city’s administration, present at the City Council’s Technology Committee hearing on the bill did not formally endorse the bill, asking its proponents to consider which agencies will fall under the rule’s purview and to come up with some possible exemptions. But Garodnick said that he felt that the administration “seemed to agree with it in principle.”

Smartphones can use an app to scan the black and white pattern of the QR code and automatically open a link in the phone’s browser, taking people to the encoded address. Garodnick demonstrated in front of city hall by scanning a printed QR code which linked to Wikipedia. Under the plan, each permit would lead to a long form report associated with it.

Proponents of the bill such as Andrew Rasiej, founder of Personal Democracy Forum and senior technology advisor at the watchdog Sunlight Foundation, say that the explosion of smartphone ownership and the amount of data that can be put online for public perusal created ripe conditions for integrating this tech into the city.

“Making real time information available to all New Yorkers is a major step toward making New York City the most wired city of the 21st century," said Rasiej.

Brewer, who authored the Open Data bill, sees the QR bill as an important companion to her legislation, which would mandate city agencies to put up more databases related to permits, violations and other public information, on an easily accessible web portal. The Open Data bill passed the Technology Committee and will see a floor vote Wednesday, where it’s expected to pass.

“It represents two policies I have been advocating on for many years: smart technology and government transparency,” said Brewer.

Photo by Jo Freeman Co.

Mary Anne Krupsak (left), pictured here with U.S. Rep. Bella Abzug, was the state's New York's first women statewide elected official, serving in the largely ceremonial post of lieutenant governor. After charging she was shut out of substantive policy-making, Krupsak ran against her boss, Gov. Hugh Carey, for the top job and lost.

On Nov. 2, 2010, New Yorkers elected candidates for state government and in doing so, probably unbeknownst to themselves, they reduced the number of female state legislators. Women hold no major leadership posts in the legislature and none of the four statewide offices, although one of New York's U.S. senators -- Kirsten Gillibrand -- is a woman.

New York State gave women the right to vote in 1917 -- three years before the 19th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution was enacted -- and has had many leaders for women's suffrage such as Susan B. Anthony and the organizers of the Seneca Falls Convention. Today, however, New York lags behind other states in terms of the representation of women in government, both in elected and appointed positions.

Experts disagree about what accounts for the glass ceiling in New York politics, although, as with everything else in politics, money seems to be one factor.

State Legislature -- Start of the Pipeline

State legislative office, particularly in the lower house or assembly, is considered to be a stepping stone to higher office, either statewide or federal. In the State Assembly elections last fall in New York, four female members did not seek re-election: Republican Dede Scozzafava, and Democrats Susan John, Joan Christensen and Ann-Margaret Carrozza. In two districts, women -- Claudia Tenney, a Republican, and Aravella Simotas, a Democrat -- took over from male legislators who sought other office. Two female Assembly members lost their bids for re-election -- Democrats Francine Delmonte and Ginny Fields. This leaves the Assembly today with 37 women representatives, or about 25 percent of seats.

Women picked up only one seat in the State Senate in 2010, despite a concerted effort by the Senate Democrats to run women against male Republican incumbents. A Republican -- Patricia Ritchie of St. Lawrence -- was the only new female candidate elected, defeating incumbent Democrat Darrel Aubertine. The Senate Democratic Campaign Committee in last fall's elections formed 16% & Rising -- so named because only 16 percent of seats (10 total) in the State Senate were held by women -- and sought to elect female Democrats, challenging incumbent male Republican legislators. Despite this effort, none of the campaign’s 12 female candidate succeeded in the election. In total, women today hold 11 of the 62 Senate seats, or about 18 percent.

For the senate races, money appears to have been a major factor. Despite the purported Democratic effort to elect women candidates, the 12 Democratic female challengers had a total bankroll of about $2 million, and the male incumbents or candidates who ultimately won had a total of about $7 million. The men were helped by state campaign law, which allows candidates to roll over money left over from past campaigns into their next race. In most cases, the men had a substantial balance from previous elections, while their female challengers had to raise the vast majority of funds in 2010. In Senate District 55 in Monroe County, which was the closest of the 12 senate races with a female Democratic challenger, Republican Sen. James Alesi won with only a 6 percent margin of victory against Democratic challenger Mary Wilmot. Wilmot raised over $600,000 in contributions, while Alesi had a bankroll of just over $1 million.

Despite a new legislature taking office this month, men continue to hold all the majority and minority leader positions in the Senate. Democratic Sen. Liz Krueger of Manhattan was thought to be in the running for deputy minority leader after the former deputy, Jeff Klein, left the Democratic conference to join the Independent Caucus, but ultimately the post went to Sen. Neil Breslin. The deputy majority leader position in the Assembly, however, is held by a woman: Vivian Cook.

Higher State Office

Last year New Yorkers elected only one woman in a statewide race -- Gillibrand -- out of a total of five races. Gillibrand, who was first elected in 2006 to the House of Representatives, now holds the seat formerly held by Hillary Rodham Clinton, the first woman to hold one of New York's U.S. Senate seats. No woman has ever having held the state offices of governor, comptroller, or attorney general in New York, though women but have been elected to the largely ceremonial position of lieutenant governor on the ticket with governor.

The first woman elected to statewide office, Mary Anne Krupsak, served as lieutenant governor to Hugh Carey from 1975 to 1978. Amid reports that she felt ostracized from the administration, she then unsuccessfully ran against Carey.

Since then, two other women have been elected as lieutenant governor, Betsy McCaughey Ross and Mary Donohue, both of whom served with Republican Gov. George Pataki. Like Krupsak with Carey, Ross felt shut out by Pataki and ultimately switched parties and ran against Pataki on the Liberal Party line for governor.

This year, only one woman even sought statewide office on a major party ticket: Nassau District Attorney Kathleen Rice, who ran for the Democratic nomination for attorney general. She lost to Eric Schneiderman.

Appointments to State Government

The underrepresentation of women extends beyond elected government. The Center for Women in Government and Civil Society at Rockefeller College, SUNY Albany conducted a nationwide study on women holding gubernatorial appointments , examining the change in representation from 1997 to 2007. While New York improved during this time period, doubling the number of women agency heads, it remains 29th in the nation for women appointed policy leaders with 33.8 percent of positions held by women.

While Gov. Andrew Cuomo still is making appointments to agencies and his own staff, so far women have accounted for six of the 14 permanent administration or agency appointments . They include: Elizabeth Glazer, as deputy secretary for public safety; Dede Scozzafava, deputy secretary for local government at the Department of State; Joan McDonald, commissioner of the state Department of Transportation; Yomika S. Bennett, assistant secretary of transportation; Leecia Eve as senior vice president and counsel to the Empire State Development Corp.; and Mitra Hormozi, chairperson of the Commission on Public Integrity. Six other Cuomo staffers who continued on from the campaign are men, including his chief of staff, counselor to the governor, executive deputy secretary, director of state operations, communications director, and deputy secretary for policy and programs.

A National Comparison

While women hold far fewer seats than men in most governments, in most respects New York still falls a bit below average. For example, as of January 2011, women make up 22.6 percent of legislators in New York State. According to the National Conference of State Legislators, women are 23.4 percent of all state legislators nationwide.

Nationally, 2010 women lost seats after a leveling off over the last few cycles, according to the National Conference of State Legislatures. Colorado, which in 1893 became the first legislature in the world to elect women representatives, today has the highest ratio of female representatives in its state legislature, with 41 percent of seats held by women. Vermont holds the next highest ratio, with 37.8 percent of seats held by women.

According to the Center for American Women in Politics at Rutgers University, the total number of women governors in 2011 is six (two Democrats, four Republicans). Three new Republican women governors were elected last year: Susana Martinez (New Mexico); Mary Fallin (Oklahoma) and Nikki Haley (South Carolina). Martinez, a Latina, and Haley, an Indian-American, are the first two women of color to serve as governors. They join re-elected women governors Jan Brewer (Republican of Arizona) and Democrats Beverly Perdue of North Carolina and Christine Gregoire of Washington. Twenty-four states, including New York, have never had a woman governor.

Women's Issues

Studies indicate that women tend to focus on different issue areas than men and often give voice to underrepresented groups. They are more likely to work on women’s rights, health care, children and families, education and housing than their male counterparts. That is not to say, however, that women do not work on other issues, such as the economy, taxation, and infrastructure.

Krueger believes that women's unique experiences mean that they view issues differently. "Women are living longer and ending up in poverty at the end of their lives more than men, and women disproportionally end up being primary caretakers for children and aging parents," she said. "The more people that are at the table making decisions that actually come with these diverse personal experiences, the more you will see change in policy and budget decisions about the priorities of the state."

Regardless of the issues, studies also indicate that women have a different leadership style than men, one that may be more in line with what voters say they want. A Pew study indicates that the voters believe women are more likely to keep government honest, and a survey of women representatives by the Center for American Women in Politics finds that women are more likely than men to conduct business in public view.

Behind the Gender Gap

While money plays a role in the shortage of women in the state, other factors may come into play as well. For example, Colorado's relatively high percentage of women may be due to its long history with women's enfranchisement. In a recent article in the New York Times, author Rebecca Traister noted that, in general, Western states have proved more receptive to women politicians than Eastern ones.

In 2010, women may have fared particularly poorly -- and not only in New York -- because many of the women seeking office were Democrats in a particularly strong year for Republicans. The major focus of the election was on congressional races, where turnout was higher for Republicans than Democrats. Krueger, who was involved in the 16% and Rising initiative, believes that voters' attention to congressional races may have hurt Democratic state legislative candidates. "Bottom of the ticket races are disproportionally impacted by what's happening at the national level," said Krueger. "Many of the women were running in districts where overlapping Democratic congressmen lost their seats."

But overall, it seems that there simply are not enough women running. "The total number of female candidates has stayed the same for past several election cycles," said Katie Ziegler, program manager of the Women's Legislative Network of the National Conference. "Studies have shown that there is no longer gender bias at the ballot. The factor now is that women aren’t running."

Research also indicates that women are more likely than men to be asked to run for office instead of deciding on their own. This indicates that recruitment is key to increasing women's representation. The political parties, as well as independent political organizations, many which also conduct trainings such as Emily's List, generally do this.

It may take more coaxing than in the past to get women to run for office, given today’s political climate. "One of reasons that we're finding fewer women are running is the tainted perception that politics is not an honorable profession; we need to encourage the best and brightest to become our elected representatives," said Krueger.

Those women who are persuaded to run may not decide soon enough. One independent political committee that supported Democratic women senate candidates in New York, the Eleanor Roosevelt Legacy Committee, believes that while money was an important factor influencing the races' outcomes, time was too. "Something overlooked as a factor is time -- some candidates didn't decide until late in the game to make that decision to be a candidate, which is one resource you can never get back," said Brette McSweeney, the committee’s executive director.

While the number of female candidates running last fall was unprecedented, McSweeney believes that the effort was not wasted. "The loss in November is not a defeat for all time.," she said. "The candidates know that they are laying the groundwork for themselves or another female candidate to run in the future."

Ziegler agrees. "Success breed success," she said. "With more attention on women in office, other women may be more likely step up as candidates and those already in office may be more likely to recruit women for their own or other seats."

Rachael Fauss is research and policy manager for Citizens Union Foundation, which publishes Gotham Gazette.

Photo by William Alatriste

Christine Quinn at a Council meeting this past November.

In December, the Council overrode a mayoral veto of the Outsourcing Accountability Act. Last week, Council Speaker Christine Quinn announced that she’d orchestrated a truce between business interests and unions over the Living Wage bill — another piece of legislation Mayor Michael Bloomberg has threatened to veto. Today, the Council passed more bills that will curb unfair parking tickets — after the Council overrides a mayoral veto, that is.

The Gotcha Tickets

The first bill, Intro 490, gives Traffic Enforcement Agents the ability to cancel tickets immediately if presented with a muni-meter ticket time-stamped within 5 minutes of the ticket being issued, which Councilman James Vacca called "gotcha" tickets. The mayor has said he will veto this bill, but the Council can override it.

“It increases the likelihood of on-street confrontations with Traffic Agents and creates a system that is ripe for abuse,” Mayoral Spokesman Marc LaVorgna said, explaining the planned veto.

The reformatting of traffic agent devices to cancel tickets on the spot would cost between $200,000 and $250,000 dollars and take approximately 180 days to implement.

Scarlet Letter for Drivers

The second bill passed today as part of the “Fair Parking Legislative Package” will stop late fees from being issued while a driver is appealing the ticket and the last will stop the city from placing stickers on cars “purportedly violating alternate side parking rules.”

The Mayor has not completed reviewing the sticker bill, according to LaVorgna, though Councilmembers seemed confident on Wednesday that he would veto the bill.

Quinn spoke passionately about the sticker bill, recounting when she had received a bright orange adhesive sticker years ago on her car for violating the alternate side-parking rules.

Some 400 tickets are affixed to cars each day and getting that “scarlet letter for drivers” was “extremely embarrassing,” Quinn said, adding that the measure is punitive and that when the city attempted to explain, it “was not really able to present a sound rational for why these stickers are necessary.” Unlike tickets, she noted, the stickers are placed on cars before drivers are given a chance to prove their innocence.

“The city testified against [lead sponsor Councilman David] Greenfield’s bill and there was no logical reason [for their opposition] — their reasoning was almost nonexistent,” said Councilman Vacca.

Under the new law, drivers will still receive tickets for violating alternate side parking laws, but stickers won’t be affixed to the cars. According to Quinn, this measure will save the city money as they don’t have to pay for the stickers or send city workers to paste them to cars.

The city rakes in approximately 600 million a year in revenue from parking tickets; it is unclear how these bills would affect that revenue, but Quinn said that the purpose of enforcement is to get people to obey the laws, not to raise revenue.

The Balance of Power

Taking his own stand against the Mayor, Councilman Jumanne Williams introduced a charter amendment bill that would aim to alter mayoral control.

"We're looking to rebalance the power in New York City; this is a bad balance of power. The mayoralty has way too much power," Councilman Williams explained to Gotham Gazette.

The bill would alter who appoints the Conflict of Interest Board. COIB’s five members are currently all appointed by the Mayor, but under the proposed legislation only three members would be appointed by the mayor. The Public Advocate and the Comptroller would each appoint an additional member, with advice and approval of the Council. The change would be subject to a referendum and is part of a package of bills that Councilman Williams is preparing and hopes will rebalance the power in the city between the Mayor and the Council. One, on which Councilman Williams is collaborating with Councilman Garodnick, would address the Mayor's control over the budget.

"The Mayor has just way too much power when it comes to deciding the revenue estimate — he can modify the budget in ways that he doesn't have to go through the Council," he said.

Photo provided by the Office of the Mayor

In yesterday’s State of the City speech, the Mayor rehashed a decade of education reform in the city’s schools and outlined the tough tactics he has planned to tackle failing schools and the teacher's unions, too.

In his eleventh and penultimate State of the City address, Mayor Michael Bloomberg proposed a new merit-pay system, more small and charter schools, and huge faculty replacements in failing schools. The mayor proposed giving teachers ranked “highly effective” for two consecutive years a $20,000 raise per year and helping top-tier recent grads teaching in city schools pay off up to $25,000 of their loans. "Their excellence deserves to be rewarded and compensated," he said.

These pay hikes and loan help would likely come at high price to teachers and their unions: an implementation of teacher evaluation and ranking, which essentially ties teacher’s jobs to the test scores of their students. Teachers advocates and education experts say these tests are faulty meters of a teacher’s ability and unions have long fought to keep evaluations from determining jobs.

The push for teacher evaluations and small schools are straight out the Gates Foundation’s education reform playbook, which has had enormous influence in New York schools.

United Federation of Teachers President Michael Mulgrew said that the Mayor was “lost in his own fantasy world of education, the one where reality doesn’t apply,” and challenged the mayor’s ability implement these initiatives without the approval of UFT.

Bloomberg pushed for teacher evaluations by principals, which is how tenure is currently decided. He blamed the teacher's union for losing city schools state funding, too, as they pushed through provisions to protect teachers from evaluations in certain low-performing schools. These protective efforts, he said, would also risk the state’s 700 million in federal grants as part of the Race to the Top program, he said.

In order to receive that funding, the state had to mandate teacher evaluations by law, but the unions in ten New York state districts, including New York City's, still haven't agreed to the deal.

The ‘Turnaround’ and Union Fight

In his sharpest attack on the union, the Mayor said that he can and will bypass the unions implementing evaluations in certain low-performing schools and replacing up to 50 percent of the faculty. This 'turnaround' program would allow school-based committees to evaluate teachers on merit, he said, and it is already approved by Federal and State law and is consistent with current union contracts. “We’re not going to wait around while ineffective teachers remain in those schools,” he said.

But in a statement, Mulgrew disagreed: “As far as the 'turnaround' model goes, the Mayor knows perfectly well that under state law these kinds of initiatives have to be negotiated with the union.”

Public Advocate Bill de Blasio criticized the mayor for his “divisive” strategies and push against the unions. “A war on teachers will not help educate our kids,” he said in a statement.

Manhattan Borough President Scott Stringer also spoke against the Mayor’s sharp attacks on unions.

“If the last nine years have shown us anything, it's that Mayor Bloomberg can't improve City schools by himself. The Lone Ranger approach to education has held us back,” he said. “Mayor Bloomberg also needs input from parents, teachers and principals, advocates and business leaders. This speech did nothing to forge those partnerships.”

The mayor also has plans to phase out 25 large schools and open up 100 new schools — including 50 new charter schools — in the city.

25 more large schools are being phased out and replaced with smaller schools in the same spaces. 100 new schools are in the works for the next two years — including 50 new charter schools.

Minimum, But Not "Living" Wage

The Mayor threw his support behind State Assembly Speaker Sheldon Silver's work to raise the minimum wage. Silver hasn’t introduced the legislation, but is expected to call for a minimum wage of at least $8.25. “Setting the minimum wage is also a balancing act — setting it high enough so people can get by on it without having a negative economic impact," Bloomberg said. "Right now, I believe we are slightly out of balance. The genius of the free market is not always perfect."

This effort was praised by most, though critics complained that that mayor still hasn’t budged on the controversial Living Wage bill which would raise the minimum wage on city-funded projects to $10 with benefits of $11.50 an hour. Bloomberg is expected to veto the bill if it passes City Council.

The New York DREAM

In addition to a passel of efforts and new schools aimed at helping New York students get to and through college, the city will also begin pushing for the New York State DREAM Act, which allows students brought to the country illegally as children to apply for state grants and scholarships to attend university.

The mayor also talked about new efforts to create jobs, create housing, and encourage entrepreneurship and the arts. Read the Mayor’s prepared remarks below. And for a good laugh, check out the video that preceded the speech with a hilarious cameo of former mayor Ed Koch welcoming cars onto the Ed Koch Queensboro Bridge.

Photo by Office of Gov. Andrew Cuomo

Gov. Andrew Cuomo had a big freshman year—so big, in fact, that some observers have wondered how he will replicate it. On Wednesday, Cuomo used his State of the State speech to try to set the agenda for the upcoming legislative session, while focusing on the spirit of bipartisanship that allowed him the successes he enjoyed in 2011.

But Cuomo’s plan was not particularly cohesive it contained many different, projects, plans, agencies, initiatives and task forces. While Cuomo repeated the mantra “jobs, jobs, jobs,” it was hard to pick up one cohesive message.

Here is what the governor had to offer:

Cuomo unveiled a plan to consolidate all of New York’s capital projects under one organization in an effort to rebuild the state’s crumbling infrastructure. He spoke of an “energy highway” that would connect energy suppliers to the areas of the state that most need it, he discussed forging a new emergency response system across the state, he brought up election reform and he unveiled an agency that is tasked with protecting tenants.

In terms of major economic development, Cuomo introduced a plan that would build the biggest convention center in the country, to be located around the Aqueduct race course in Queens, while turning the Javits Convention Center into a mixed use facility. He insisted that the state must pursue casino gambling. He also found a new interest in education, declaring that he was taking on a second job as a lobbyist for the students. He also pushed for a new pension tier to the dismay of labor groups.

But what Cuomo didn’t mention in his speech was as interesting to some as what he did say. Missing from the delivered speech were references to two of the most controversial issues facing New York State today: his stance on the practice of hydraulic fracturing and how he plans to address the redistricting process.

The Convention Center

The focal point of Cuomo’s convention center would be the Aqueduct Racino in Queens. Cuomo said the planned center would be bigger than Chicago’s McCormick Place and have around 3,000 hotel rooms. The project would take $4 billion in private investment and be built by Genting, the Malaysian company that built the racino. The proposal was a big hit with a number of city representatives. Sen. Jose Peralta said he thought the idea would be a major boost for Queens and said he hoped to see a number of people from Queens involved in the process. “I fully and wholeheartedly support the idea of building the country's largest convention center in Queens,” said Peralta. “I will work with Governor Cuomo and help however I can in making this vision for the Aqueduct Racetrack venue a reality.”

Brooklyn Borough President Marty Markowitz was also enthused. “I say bravo to the proposed convention center in Queens—even if it can’t be in Brooklyn, it’s about time,” said Markowitz in a statement. Markowitz also praised Cuomo’s push to legalize casino gambling, saying he thinks Coney Island would be a natural fit for it.

Manhattan Borough President Scott Stringer also backed the convention center plan. “New York City deserves and must have a convention venue that is spacious and modern enough to accommodate international trade shows and conventions, and I look forward to working with the governor to ensure that we continue to attract top-flight conferences from around the globe. We must also find ways to breathe new life into the site of the Jacob Javits Center on Manhattan's West Side,” said Stringer in a statement.

Education

The Cuomo administration had heated battles with education advocates throughout 2011 and it looks like those battles will continue in 2012. The administration specifically went out of its way to label Billy Easton of the Alliance for Quality Education as a representative of “special interests.” During his address, Cuomo continued to hammer away on the theme of special interests in education as he announced a commission that will look into performance and accountability in schools. “I learned that everyone in public education has his or her own lobbyist,” said Cuomo. “Superintendents have lobbyists. Principals have lobbyists. Teachers have lobbyists. School boards have lobbyists. Maintenance personnel have lobbyists. Bus drivers have lobbyists. The only group without a lobbyist? The students. Well, I learned my lesson. This year, I will take a second job; consider me the lobbyist for the students. I will wage a campaign to put students first, and to remind us that the purpose of public education is to help children grow, not to grow the public education bureaucracy,” Cuomo concluded.

The Alliance for Quality Education released a statement rebutting Cuomo’s remarks before he had even delivered them. “If Governor Cuomo intends to be an effective lobbyist for every school child across the state his budget will incorporate the New York State Board of Regents call for fairness and equity in our schools by prioritizing funding to high needs schools,” said Nikki Jones, communications director for the Alliance for Quality Education in a statement. “In his first year, it was Governor Cuomo’s budget that failed to represent students’ educational needs by slashing 11,000 teaching positions and cutting arts, music, after school and college prep courses.”

Good Government

Cuomo dedicated a small portion of his speech to advocating the passage of public financing of elections. Cuomo invoked the city’s system as a model for the state to follow. "New York City's public financing system provides a good model for statewide reform. The system has helped to increase the number of overall contributors--and especially the number of smaller donors--in city elections," he said. Good government groups were quick to praise Cuomo.

“We are extremely pleased that Governor Cuomo has prioritized the need to reform the state’s broken campaign finance system,” said Bill Mahoney of New York Public Interest Research Group in a statement. “When the number of New Yorkers who contribute to political races is less than those living in prison, it is clear that a system such as public financing is needed to encourage candidates to reach out to a broader group of residents."

Citizens Union, which is the sister organization to the Citizens Union Foundation, which publishes Gotham Gazette, was also quick to praise the move, saying: “Campaign finance reform has long been seen by Citizens Union as fundamental to changing the culture in Albany.”

But the good government groups were largely silent on the fact that Cuomo did not mention his stance on redistricting during the speech. Redistricting is seen as perhaps the issue of the moment right now in Albany, as Legislative Task Force on Research and Reapportionment is set to reveal its district lines. Cuomo’s promise to veto unfair lines was part of his written speech but not part of his delivered remarks. Journalists were quick to note that the line was left out of the delivered remarks, but representatives of good government groups seemed unconcerned. Dick Dadey, executive director of Citizens Union, quickly responded to Liz Benjamin of Capital Tonight on Twitter when she pointed out the omission. "But that doesn't mean reform won't happen. Just watch,” tweeted Dadey at Benjamin.

The Environment

Cuomo’s failure to mention hydraulic fracturing in his remarks seems to be taken by those with vested interests as a win for environmental groups that oppose the controversial practice. “While Governor Cuomo deserves credit for laying out a formula for leveraging economic growth by investing in the state’s energy infrastructure, it was disappointing that he did not define where New York’s abundant supply of clean-burning natural gas fits into the equation,” said James Smith of the Independent Oil and Gas Association in a statement. The New York Water Rangers hesitantly took the omission as a good sign for their cause. “The New York Water Rangers hope this omission signals that he is heeding the call of tens of thousands of New Yorkers to slow the rush to drill, that his support for fracking is waning, and that the oil and gas industry's siren song regarding its economic benefits is no longer as alluring,” said Erica Ringewald in a statement. “In the Governor's written remarks, he indicated that, given the ongoing review of impacts and large number of public comments, no decisions have been made to permit fracking.

Transportation

Cuomo spent a major portion of his speech talking about rebuilding New York’s infrastructure, talking specifically about creating an entity to oversee all of the state’s capital projects and putting people to work rebuilding the state’s roads and bridges. But city-based transportation advocates did not hear what they were hoping for on funding for public transportation. “The State of New York’s public transit is poor,” said Paul Steely White, Executive Director of Transportation Alternatives in a statement. “From Buffalo to Brooklyn, New Yorkers are losing affordable public transit options because of the fare hikes and service cuts that are the result of a chronic lack of transit funding. To protect businesses and jobs in this state, Governor Cuomo would do well to consider the millions of businesses around the state that are wed to transit.”

“While the Governor is right to call for greater investment in infrastructure, Albany cannot continue to give short shrift to funding transit across our state,” said White. “Public transit projects create a jobs dividend that stretches from the five boroughs to Upstate New York. From manufacturing jobs in the North Country to construction jobs in the metropolitan area, fully funding public transit not only helps get millions of people to work every day, it creates good-paying jobs for New Yorkers.”

City Focused

The convention center wasn’t the only thing Cuomo brought up that had to do with the five boroughs. Something that very likely got the attention of Mayor Michael Bloomberg was Cuomo’s insistence that the city must stop fingerprinting people who want access to food stamps. Cuomo echoed what advocates have been demanding for years. "For all of our progress, there are still basic wrongs to right. There is never an excuse for letting any child in New York go to bed hungry. We must increase participation in the food stamp program, remove barriers to participation, and eliminate the stigma associated with this program. And we must stop fingerprinting for food."

Cuomo’s announcement of a Tenant Protection Agency made a number of legislators hopeful that the administration is paying attention to tenants’ issues. Sen. Jose Peralta said he was excited by the prospect of the agency, but the only details he had were that “They created it.” He hopes to hear more soon.

"Too many tenants have been abused for too long, and it stops now," Cuomo said. The agency will be housed in New York State Homes and Community Renewal. It is charged with proactively enforcing “landlord obligations” and imposing “strict penalties for failure to comply with New York's rent laws," Cuomo said.

But That Isn’t All

Cuomo previewed what is sure to be a major battle between his administration and organized labor when he discussed pension reform. Cuomo said a new pension tier would affect only future hires. A number of labor supporters noted that those future jobs will be getting the unemployed back on track and should be quality jobs with benefits that will bolster the middle class. Civil Service Employees Association president Danny Donohue was not pleased with Cuomo’s focus on a new pension tier. “I am frankly surprised that the Governor gave such high priority to a new pension tier, with emphasis on immediate impact. A Tier V was only recently enacted and will not provide the state and localities with any significant savings for many years. A Tier VI would be no different and would only mean that working people would have to work longer, pay more and benefit less – hardly in keeping with the Governor’s goal of strengthening the middle class,” Donohue said in a statement.

Meanwhile, the Green Party and Hunger Action slammed Cuomo for ignoring the needs of lower income families. "Governor Cuomo’s agenda for 2012 is designed to maintain the power and wealth of the 1%, promoting austerity rather than prosperity for the vast majority of New Yorkers,” said state co-chair Howie Hawkins."

While Mark Dunlea of Hunger Action applauded Cuomo’s stance on fingerprinting for food stamp recipients, he said he didn’t hear much else to be happy about. "It was encouraging to at least hear the word hunger in the Governor's address. But the harsh economic reality that many low and moderate income New Yorkers face was largely ignored, and even on his limited proposals we need to see the details," noted Dunlea. "Certainly missing in any sense that the Governor has a real jobs program to restore the 500,000 jobs we have lost since 2007. We need a public jobs initiative that is going to provide real jobs, especially in low-income neighborhoods, and communities of color."

Photo by Gail Robinson

Assemblymember John "Jack" McEneny presides over a redistricting hearing in Manhattan.

Last week City Hall News named Assemblymember John "Jack" McEneny, Democratic chair of the New York State Legislative Task Force on Reapportionment and Redistricting or LATFOR, one of the losers of the week. It gave the epithet to McEneny because of the way he conducted himself during hearings in the city as politicians and good government groups criticized the current redistricting process. Former Mayor Ed Koch, an advocate for independent redistricting insistently called McEneny an "enemy of the people."

But if McEneny, who has defended the current redistricting process, is losing, he certainly doesn't seem to mind -- or even to be aware of it. The good government groups that have chided him and the legislative task force all summer long have splintered in their efforts to reform the redistricting process, and some are unsure whether Gov. Andrew Cuomo is still committed to major reform.

With time running out politicians and advocates are jockeying for position. When the process ends though, it could turn out that not very much has changed.

A Falling Out

McEneny, meanwhile, seems to be tinkled pink. The Albany Assembly member, who is renowned for his expertise on redistricting, has had a number of defensive and contentious moments with good government groups, with Koch and other officials. Seeing them suffer some slings and arrows does not bother him a bit.

"The [LATFOR] hearings started with a lot of resentment, but that resentment has melted away," said McEneny cheerfully. "There were a lot of red herrings thrown out against us -- like we weren’t going to count prisoners. We are going to count them; we have been and will continue to unless the court tells us to stop."

Last week two major good government groups split in their effort to get the legislature to return to Albany to pass a bill creating an independent redistricting commission, up until now a key demand of all the good government groups. Saying that time was running short to pass the legislation, Susan Lerner, executive director of Common Cause, announced that her group would focus on how the lines are drawn instead of focusing on who draws them. McEneny chuckled as he recalled watching the groups react to the split.

Dick Dadey, executive director of Citizens Union (Gotham Gazette is published by the sister organization of Citizens Union the Citizens Union Foundation), told the Albany Times Union’s Jimmy Vielkind, who broke the story of the split among the groups, that Common Cause was "dead wrong. They don't know the state of discussions going on right now among the three parties critical to making that decision." Dadey insisted there is still time to pass legislation creating an independent commission.

Lerner, who declined to be interviewed for this article, told the Times Union that she disagreed. "Of course we support an independent commission, but what we think has to be clear is that it is equally or more important how the lines are drawn, and less who draws the lines, at this late stage," said Lerner. "The criteria, at the end of the day, control the map."

Dadey unveiled his own altered plan at a LATFOR hearing last week. "Citizens Union and others are willing to work with the legislature and the governor to adopt a less-than-ideal approach for 2012," said Dadey. He then proposed that a commission appointed by legislators -- but not made up of legislators -- take over the work of LATFOR this year. Dadey also wants legislators to agree to pass a constitutional amendment that would implement independent redistricting for the next round in 2022.

Not all good government groups have given up on the original plan. The League of Women Voters and the New York Public Interest Research Group are both sticking to their guns.

"A lot of organizations turned on a dime," said Barbara Bartoletti , legislative director for League of Women Voters of New York. "We have carried our position for 40 years. We support an independent commission. Do we believe the powers that be will allow this to be done? We aren't naĂŻve and time is short, but the public is aware that this is a bad process and they know that legislators took pledges to do this. The public is watching."

Bill Mahoney, legislative operations and research coordinator for NYPIRG, said that his group still believes there is time for the legislature to return. "Without a doubt we still think there is time for an independent redistricting commission and that legislators should keep their promise and return to pass a bill creating an independent commission," he said.

The Veto Threat

The disputes between groups aside, it remains unclear how -- or if -- the differences will affect the drawing of the lines, which must be completed in advance of next year's primary for seats in the state legislature and the U.S. Congress.

So far neither Common Cause's option or Citizens Union's has won favor with Senate Republicans, who are afraid of losing their hold of the Senate in the redistricting process changes. Cuomo told the Times Union's Vielkind this summer that he would veto lines "that are not drawn by an independent commission, that are partisan."

A number of observers think it is hard to envision any scenario for a nonpartisan redistricting that does not weaken -- or even doom -- Republican control of the Senate. Vielkind described the situation as "life-and-death" for Senate Republicans in a Q&A with Capital New York.

Some think the stage has been set for a compromise between Cuomo and Senate Republicans. Even reform advocates who have full faith in Cuomo's veto are unsure exactly what will happen if he actually uses it.

The Department of Justice threw an added complication into the already murky situation earlier this month when it filed a petition to force New York to move its primary up to at least 80 days before the 2012 elections. Such a move, which is intended to make it easier for military personnel serving overseas to vote, would place the primary on Aug. 18 next year. The state has filed a request for a waiverfor next year, pledging to move the primary up starting in 2013. But if the state is forced to have an earlier primary, that would leave very little time for LATFOR to deliver its district lines, Cuomo to veto them and the courts to draw new lines.

In light of this, McEneny questioned whether Cuomo would make good on his veto pledge. "I believe that the primary will be moved up to June. I think vetoing the lines would be irresponsible with that kind of deadline," said McEneny.. "Are you really going to veto a bill you have never read?"




Dadey believes the opposite. "The governor has been very clear that he will veto lines that are partisan and that LATFOR is not capable of drawing impartial lines."

Some think he will have no choice. "He has to veto" said Liz Benjamin of the State of Politics blog at a forum on Cuomo last night. "He has no wiggle room."

But Steve Greeenberg, a pollster for the Siena Research Institute, disagreed. "If he decides to sign it because he got x, y or z from the legislature he can sign it," Greenberg said. "There will be plenty of wiggle room, and he will not pay a serious price."

The governor's office has continued to state that the governor is committed to fair redistricting lines and have said they are considering the plans presented by Common Cause and Citizens Union.

Sen. Liz Krueger, who prompted McEneny to ask whether she had actually ever been upstate when she criticized one district said to resemble Abraham Lincoln riding a lawn mower, said she thinks the way forward is actually pretty clear. Krueger supports Common Cause's plan, which she things covers all bases. "I don’t think an independent redistricting commission is possible at this point," said Krueger, but the governor could mandate LATFOR to follow the standards in his program bill."

Lerner and Sean Coffey laid out two major standards for LATFOR to follow in an op-ed for the Times Union called "How to Save NY Redistricting Reform." The first standard would be to "prioritize respecting communities of interest." Lerner and Coffey say this could be achieved by drawing lines "to recognize communities of interest, such as social, cultural, ethnic, economic and racial similarities. Prioritizing the way in which people actually 'feel' the boundaries of their neighborhoods minimizes drawing districts that prioritize creating safe seats for a particular political party."

The second standard is to, "minimize or eliminate political self-interest in drawing the maps." To do that, Lerner and Coffey say, the redistricting process should be based on demographics, "not the needs of the incumbent."

If the LATFOR does not comply, Krueger said Cuomo could then veto the lines but, instead of throwing the issue to the courts, have people submit alternative maps. "I'm sure Common Cause would be happy to do the maps for New York if they were asked; they have the technology and they are already drawing maps," she said.

Krueger pointed to a recent article by an undergraduate who put out his own district maps, basing his lines on the recent census. "Something that took weeks before is now a three-day project that a college kid can handle," Krueger said. 

"We can say to LATFOR, 'This isn't the '70s anymore. You aren't drawing lines on a big map and coloring them in." Krueger says new technology also allows the public to understand much better what LATFOR is doing. “Thanks to the internet and media people are paying attention. Everyone is watching and we can see a farce is a farce," she said.

Behind Closed Doors

Meanwhile, reports about redistricting deals have been popping up left and right. One report said that Senate Majority Leader Dean Skelos is floating the idea of "adding a seat to the Senate to prevent a future split of the chamber. This GOP did add a seat 10 years ago, creating the current even number of seats.

A Daily News "gossip column spoke of a possible deal forged by the members of the Senate Independent Democratic Conference with Republicans to keep their districts intact.

Some signs, if they can be trusted, would indicate that the redistricting wheels are already turning while LATFOR is out taking input from the public.

McEneny notes that LATFOR has extended its hearing schedule, adding two dates. He says he has learned quite a bit from groups he says are concerned about making sure their districts are represented properly. McEneny insists that LATFOR is still diligently working on drawing lines while taking input from the public.

"It is very important that the public has been able to offer their ideas, but I very much doubt that they are going to be used, because they would end LATFOR's control," said Dadey. "The input that LATFOR has gathered from the public will be useful when the independent commission starts its work."

McEneny agreed that LATFOR's work would be useful even if a new group takes over. But McEneny thinks it is too late for a legislative option this year. He says the governor's independent redistricting bill -- a bill McEneny points out he and Assembly Speaker Sheldon Silver support -- is "too rigid" for Senate Republicans. "The governor failed to convince the Senate that we could make it work this year. I assume there have been closed door discussions, but I don't know. The governor doesn't call me," McEneny said.

Dadey said that without a doubt there have been discussions "between affected parties." He added, "Technology is such that there would be time for a commission to pull together maps” and "for the legislature to return and pass the legislation."


Krueger said that redistricting reform is "a test for our state." She said that t an election expert told her that if LATFOR is replaced. the federal government would review the new system for 60 days. "There is already a 60-day period where they review the maps. If you look at the calendar I don't think you can find two 60-day periods. I have been told by a lot of election experts that the governor's program bill is a good bill and we would get good lines if the standards in it were followed. So they should be followed by LATFOR," she said.

Krueger noted she has attended LATFOR hearings and read the reports. She said this has led her to reach some conclusions: "There hasn't been outcry at these meetings in favor of gerrymandering. Even people from upstate communities want the system to be fair. They want good representation."